The Real Problem With The London
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 21 окт 2024
- In this video IM Kostya Kavutskiy breaks down two hotly debated questions on the London System:
1) Does White have good chances for an advantage, compared to 1.e4 or 1.d4?
2) Is playing the London good for overall chess improvement?
What do you think?
Follow ChessDojo here:
Twitch: / chessdojolive
Discord: / discord
Twitter: / chess_dojo
I started out playing 1. c4 and 2. g3 and i didn't get much of anywhere, d4 c4 got me some points, but eventually i plateaued. Decided to go 1. e4 and transition to the good stuff - Nc3 French, Open Sicilian, etc without studying too much theory. I was 1800 on lichess falling for some basic open game traps but eventually I got the hang of it and I would say I gained ~150 points on 1. e4. What's nice about starting out with 1. e4 is that if your opponent makes a typical beginner mistake, it's easier to punish. If I play 1. d4 and my beginner opponent blocks their c pawn with their knight, it's harder to directly punish, but if my opponent plays that "Anti Fried Liver" defense, I know to open the center and start active piece play. As black I was trying literally anything except e5 and settled on the french, but eventually I realized I was only winning in the french when my opponents blundered their d pawn in the advance variation (which happened quite often, so I thought the french was great for a while). Decided to pick up e5 for the same reasons and it's working out well. Against d4 I was doing well with the QGD, but I am eventually going to pick up King's Indian because I need to get more of those messy positions where calculation is key and it is important to know how to handle the closed center. I think the moral of my story is to play the sharpest stuff possible when you start out, just make sure you understand the pawn structures that come out of your openings, as that will guide you through some theory.
1. c4 and then 2. Nc3 is better imho. Black can pull some stupid crappy stuff with 2. g3. I played it also for a bit, but found that Nc3 is just better and more suiting to my style.
I agree. I think people who play the Collie and the London are being penny wise and pound foolish. Sure you will score some quick points at the beginning because your more familiar with the opening then your opponent. In the long term you are stunting your development because you are only familiar with only one type of structure.
Same here. about 1.5 years ago I was like 1700 playing c4/d4. When i switched to e4 i finally broke 1900.
Now Im 2100 and exclusivly playing d4/c4.
Imo the higher you get the harder it becomes to get anywhere with 1.e4 because thats usually what black studies the most
e4 and the Italian really aren't all that sharp.
Thank you for sharing your story
I think lots of people complain about the London because they think it leads to boring positions (I'm looking at you ChessExplained! :) ), but I don't think it has to be that. Carlsen, Kamsky, Jobava, and Rosen all have excellent and exciting games in the London.
Kamsky, Carlsen, Jobava, Rapport and Le Quang Liem have very solid London System concepts.
A very fair assessment. Thank you...
You're absolutely right, I'm a beginner and kind of stuck because of the mindset you mention. I'm now sure I need to start varying the way I play the London depending on my opponents responses and also start learning other openings. Thanks alot.
Glad it helped!
Good video I agree with the main point that the London is debilitating to progress and a crutch. I'm playing d4 c4. I use to be a london player but I got very bored of the structure so I moved on for that reason.
I totally agree with you Kostya! I played with the London system for many years, especially when I started out in chess. I do think to keep your interest in chess and to learn a lot more, its good to try new openings. Similar opening is the Colle-Zukertort system or Jobava London, which is also fun to play, and using these openings as safe options can come in handy. I started playing Vienna Gambit and 2.Nc3 closed Sicilian as white, and also English. Had tons of fun playing them. Playing London can feel boring to play every game, so keep enjoying chess with new openings!
I was stucked with the London and as you said I had a hard time getting out of my confort zone and learning a new opening... I recently moved to the English, often transposing to a queen's gambit, but still get stuff wrong in both of those. The English is a little confusing sometimes but I like the idea
Very helpful(constructive) discussion about an important topic. Now, what about the Colle, Torre, Colle-Zukertort, .... :-)
Same points! It's more about the mindset rather than the opening chosen
I’ve been playing e4 for years, thinking about trying the london
Of course, Uhlmann made a good side career as a GM being devoted to a single opening, in his case the French. People argue that since top opponents are universal players these days, being committed to a single opening won't work now. But I don't see the connection.
People reinventing the wheel...
You need self-awareness to improve in chess. If you lack the wits for that, you can try 1000 different methods and never make much progress.
Some people like to play various openings, some prefer specializing. The key is in knowing yourself rather than trying to apply someone else's introspective conclusions.
I've been playing the London exclusively from 800 elo in rapid, hit 2400, and have no intention of dropping it any time soon.
I chose the London because it was the easiest solution to my beginner problems, but also knowing that it works at super GM level...It also suits the play style I want to build over time.
I've lost many otb classical games because of my lack of knowledge, but I kept on trucking, knowing I would start reaping the benefits once I started understanding positional play.
Gimmicky gambits and certain openings only work up to a certain point. But London is perfectly fine...
Very well done. Thank you. Totally agree with all you said. Thanks for mentioning Eric Rosen; I have his 80/20 London program, and I'll look up his games. I'm sure you know that GM Simon Williams, who has done a lot to popularize the London, pushes it as a system for lazy people. I guess you'd say that might do more harm than good. Thanks, again.
I also bought that course, it’s so awesome :))
Ginger GM is a charlatan selling flawed and outdated courses. People have complained on Chessable, opened forum threads, created community spreadsheets for all the things he's done wrong - and he just ignores it all and keeps making money on the newcomers.
2-3 years into chess you'll realize how much of a fraud he is.
Does the Petroff also fall in the same category of always the same stuctures? Or fine if you also play 1.e4 and mainlines vs d4?
I'd say Black openings should be judged differently as usually it's up to White to choose the nature of the position. So even as a Petroff player you will be exposed to sharp positions. A few more openings I'd give as 'system openings' are King's Indian Attack, Colle/Zukertort, Torre Attack, and perhaps the Flamingo if anything from Black's point-of-view :)
@@ChessDojo Example of sharp positions from there- the Cochrane Gambit and those 5. Nc3 lines with opposite sided castling come to mind.
Colle-Zukertort is a club level opening. I wouldn't use it against more advanced players.
Another good video from IM Kostya. You explained well about the attractiveness of London System and rightly mentioned that if we just got stuck with it, more likely we could be lazy to study other openings, going through process of studying, got beaten etc. I am a 1.E4 player usually play Italian occasionally play Scotch. And against other blavk reply, i will use KIA. I am half way studying London system, with the motivation to add some variety to 1.E4 with 1. D4. I think you give very good and objective thought on London. Great insight.
just needed this video :)
I like it because I don't get instantly crushed
Good starting point!
I didn't know the chess community despised the London so much until I saw this video. Now I wanna play the London more lol
@@thaddtermeer6688 I recently joined a chess club and one member grumbled when they saw I played the London (I got a win too so if the hatred comes from "it works" then I'll live with the derision)
That means it's a crutch. No more, no less.
Chess is a gift to humanity. Thank you Kosta for such a soothing lecture.
I thought people played the london to avoid the sicilian
I do!
In rated games I love facing the London, it's nearly a full point as I've faced it so often and London players don't learn to play well against my style.
But I hate playing casual games as London players just play the same every game and rarely improve their chess.
It's a cop out .. typical London players are not Rosen or Kamsky but folk taking short cuts.
Very good video.
When you reach a certain level of play the London stops being as effective. I'm not at that level yet, but I'm attempting to learn the Catalan, which definitely takes longer to learn.
Cool!
That is not true. It even works at 2700 level. If you have a great understanding of the London positions it can be effective at any level.
any anti london ?
Englund
Early c5 followed by Qb6.